Sorry that is utter nonsense. No one lives on a balanced budget. You yourself deficit spend via mortgages, car loans and credit cards. You cannot pay cash for a house so you deficit spend. Govt does the same thing in times of war and recession. Fiscal Conservatives, like all good credit analyists, look at the debt to income ration, NOT total debt. $500,000 in debt for most people would the end of the world, it is insignificant to someone like Bill Gates.
Perhaps the Fiscal Reactionaries might explain to us how Great Britain has managed a National Debt for about 400 years if this is such a looming crises?
It always is amusing when people lecture about "Economic Common Sense" when they clearly do not know basic Economics themselves.
There is a difference between deficits that fund investments and deficits that fund current expenditure. The purchase of a house is an investment, not because it might rise in value, but because it provides an expected flow of future benefits (a roof over your head and no rent payments).
Most federal government expenditure is on current expenditure (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid). The expenditure is not to acquire assets. There is no future flow of benefits, just a demand for more expenditure.
Any credit analyst will look less favorably on borrowing to fund current expenditure (e.g. taking a loan to pay for groceries) than borrowing to acquire an asset (e.g. a home mortgage). Most government borrowing is of the borrowing for the groceries type.